All three of Gov. Dennis Daugaard’s major vetoes were upheld Monday, the last day of the legislative session in Pierre.

Daugaard had vetoed the following legislation:

Senate Bill 157, which would have prohibited cities from placing restrictions on outdoor advertising;

House Bill 1228, which would have given tax breaks to wind energy projects and the Big Stone coal-fired power plant in Grant County;

and HB1248, which would have allowed any adult with a valid South Dakota driver’s license to carry a concealed weapon without a permit.

All three died Monday in the House, though the vote to override the veto on the concealed-carry bill passed the Senate.

The billboard and tax incentive bills exposed some regional divisions: SB157, because it was brought in response to a Rapid City ordinance banning digital billboards and because it would benefit Brookings-based Daktronics; and HB1228 because it would have benefited East River energy interests.

Lawmakers inserted the tax breaks into HB1228 after an unsuccessful attempt by Republican lawmakers to slip a new economic development program into a carcass bill. In doing so, they would have circumvented a public vote in November on the Large Project Development Fund, Daugaard’s economic incentive program that was approved last year by the Legislature.

As amended, the bill would have refunded half of the construction taxes incurred by energy companies that invest $50 million or more in a wind power project. Owners of the 475-megawatt Big Stone plant also would have been refunded half of the construction taxes for a $489 million project to upgrade its emissions equipment.

In his veto message, Daugaard said the legislation hadn’t been fully vetted and would disproportionately benefit out-of-state ratepayers. He also objected to the $50 million floor for wind projects, which he said discriminated against small projects, and said it would be improper to pass an economic development law before voters have their say on the Large Project Development Fund.

(Page 2 of 2)

Much of the opposition to the bill came from West River lawmakers.

“We know that gas and oil are stuff that works,” said Rep. Phil Jensen, R-Rapid City. “So why don’t we just focus on the northwest corner of the state where we do have gas and oil, and work on developing that, rather than subsidizing something that gives you only 40 percent on your dollar?”

“I would hope that we don’t lose sight that we’re all in this together,” he said, urging his colleagues to vote to override.

The vote was 44-23, three votes short of the two-thirds majority needed for an override. Nine lawmakers who voted for the bill the first time around voted against it this time. One legislator, Democrat Frank Kloucek of Scotland, voted for it after having voted against it the first time.

Ron Rebenitsch, executive director of the South Dakota Wind Energy Association, said the vote was disappointing but his organization would continue to lobby for a more favorable tax climate. He also said he would support a lower floor, around $10 million, so community-scale wind projects could benefit, too.

Next, the House took up the concealed-carry bill, which law enforcement groups opposed on public safety grounds.

Lawmakers who spoke in favor of loosening restrictions said the permit requirement was a constitutional violation. Rep. Stace Nelson, R-Fulton, compared the requirement with having to obtain a permit to go to church or speak freely.

“We have God-given rights,” he said. “This is America. One of those God-given rights was the right to defend yourself, to bear arms.”

Rep. Gene Abdallah, R-Sioux Falls, said the bill’s proponents were exaggerating the difficulty of obtaining a permit.

“I’m totally in favor of Second Amendment rights,” he said, “but what’s the difference if I go in and apply for a carry-conceal or I have to show my driver’s license? Either one, according to them, is a violation of your Second Amendment rights. Hogwash.”

The vote failed 27-40, a big swing from the 50-18 House vote that approved the bill.

“It was a close call this year,” said Minnehaha County Sheriff Mike Milstead, who opposed the law. “I’ll be surprised if it doesn’t get revisited.”

Last was the digital advertising bill. Last year, Rapid City voters passed an ordinance banning new digital billboards in the city, and Lamar Advertising sued the city in federal court. SB157 would have prevented cities from banning new billboard technology.

In his veto message, Daugaard said lawmakers should wait to see the outcome of the court case before attempting to legislate a solution. Backers of the bill garnered enough support Monday to override the veto in the Senate but fell three votes shy in the House, 43-24.